Jump to content


Photo

Baader Wedge questions

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 26 December 2013 - 07:19 PM

Using a Baader wedge with binoviewers.

First, just want to confirm that it is the T2-27 that I need to mount a Mark V with Quick connect Ring.

Next, I don't like the Solar continuum filter. Would prefer to replace it.

On the Solar forum, the responses were to use a polarizer on the eyepeiece, but I would rather use a second neutral density filter mounted in the Baader wedge. but they come in a variety of different strengths.

Was wondering if anyone using a binoviewer with the Baader Wedge has done this (replace the SC filter with a ND) and if so, which ND gave the right brightness. Would like it to be about as bright as it would be with Baader Solar Film. A bit brighter for me personally is a bit better than having it a bit dimmer.

I just don't have any idea as to which filter working with the 3.0 will give the desired result...

Thanks!

#2 Tak North

Tak North

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 609
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

Posted 27 December 2013 - 12:40 AM

I use my Denk IIs with my Baader Wedge.

Obviously I don't use T2s in this configuration, so can't comment there.
Yes, ditch the continuum filter. I find it distracting at best.
I only use one ND filter. Makes up nicely for the light loss of splitting the light in the BV.
Never tried a polarizer. But like you say in the other thread I've never been at a loss for detail with this setup!

#3 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 27 December 2013 - 09:56 AM

Well, I did try without the Solar Continuum filter briefly yesterday but the image seemed a bit to bright for me.

Will try again today. I actually like a bit brighter image, but it may have been to bright.

Will try the SC again though I need to give it a fair shake.

Baader says it improves some detail (granulation), but I have not had any trouble seeing granualtion with the Solar Filter so would be surprised if it were less visible in the wedge.

Thanks for the feedback...

#4 DaveJ

DaveJ

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1719
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2005
  • Loc: NE Ohio

Posted 27 December 2013 - 11:42 AM

Well, I did try without the Solar Continuum filter briefly yesterday but the image seemed a bit to bright for me.
Will try again today. I actually like a bit brighter image, but it may have been to bright.
Will try the SC again though I need to give it a fair shake.


Eddgie,

When I first got my Baader Herschel Wedge, I had the same negative response to the Solar Continuum filter as you. I took it out and replaced it with a 2" Baader polarizer and enjoyed the ability to lighten/darken the image as required. As I'm sure you already know, the light coming from the prism is already partially polarized, so the additional polarizer enables a sure-fire way to adjust the brightness. Keep in mind, that the prism in the binoviewers ALSO acts as a polarizer and the rotation of the Mark V in the quick-release has the effect of darkening/lightening the image as well. I have since returned to the Solar Continuum filter and find it provides the highest amount of detail possible. It has gained permanent residency status in the Herschel, especially when using the Mark V. I've even tried separate 1.25" polarizers on the individual eyepieces and found that has some merit, too. So many options, so little time!

#5 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 27 December 2013 - 01:05 PM

Well, sadly, I have a new solar wedge and no sunshine.

I will give it a few sessions. Again, I have an excellent baseline having used the Baader film filter, so I will in fact be interested to see if it is an improvement.

I am using a 10mm SCT to T2 connector, but I would prefer to use the T2-27 to get the BV down closer to the diagonal.

But for now, I will hold off on ordering the ND filter.

#6 mark8888

mark8888

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1777
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2010

Posted 27 December 2013 - 11:17 PM

Hi Eddgie,

I also really don't like the continuum filter... I'm not into the green sun. I also don't use a polarizer. Instead, I use an extra ND filter to darken the image. But, which one depends on the amount of mag I'm using, and whether or not I'll be taking some pictures during the session (more light may = better pictures). I'd recommend getting both the 0.6 and the 1.8 and experimenting with them. I'm honestly not sure which one I use more, right now I have in the 0.6 (this is in addition to the 3.0 which is always installed for safety, of course). If I were to get only one additional one, I think I'd probably choose the 1.8. The 0.6 alone (again, always with the 3.0) is still a bit too bright for me, I think, when using low mags - but you might prefer it if you're looking for a bright image. I bought the P version of the wedge, so it came with the extra filters.

Congrats on getting the wedge, by the way! I'd be interested to hear how you think it compares to the film.

#7 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 27 December 2013 - 11:56 PM

I got it as a gift and put the visual version on the list before I realized that I would have been better off getting the Photo version because of all the filters.

Oh well.

I do like the image a bit brighter because I tend to observer more at between 82x and 120x. Sometimes I go lower, but most of the time I stick around high powers waiting for moments of good seeing.

Someone else said that the .6 with the 3.0 should be the same as using the wedge (in terms of transmission). And the Filter for me was perfect in terms of brightness.

But for now, I am going to just try it with the SC filter. Will see if I warm up to it.

#8 axle01

axle01

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 227
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2013
  • Loc: Townsville Nth Qld Australia

Posted 28 December 2013 - 12:42 AM


I also really don't like the continuum filter... I'm not into the green sun. I also don't use a polarizer. Instead, I use an extra ND filter to darken the image.


I don't like the green sun either, so what colour do you get with this combination and if I were to replace the continuum filter with a Baader Polarizer what colour could I expect to get.

#9 Kunama

Kunama

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 745
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 28 December 2013 - 02:39 AM

White

The SC does show more fine detail in the umbra/penumbra but if you can't get used to a lime green image then the 3.0 + 0.9 is about the same brightness but with a white Sun instead. 3.0 on its own is too bright, the 0.6 is fine to use but if I only bought 1 extra ND filter it would be the 0.9.

#10 axle01

axle01

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 227
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2013
  • Loc: Townsville Nth Qld Australia

Posted 28 December 2013 - 03:12 AM

Thanks Matt in Oz (where in Oz) I have the P version so I will try that.

Alan

#11 Kunama

Kunama

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 745
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 28 December 2013 - 03:28 AM

Thanks Matt in Oz (where in Oz) I have the P version so I will try that.

Alan

Hi Alan,
I have just moved from Jindabyne to Canberra. I too have the 'P' version which I scored for $350 in mint (unused !!!) condition. Matt

#12 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1988
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 28 December 2013 - 09:56 AM

Ed, the wedge (2" ?)will probably consume some additional backfocus, maybe 20-25mm or so.

I use a deep yellow filter as I prefer the warmer tone, however, as my old rods'n cones move around the view turns a bit greenish, which is easily fixed by taking a break and looking around for a bit. The steeper filters do indeed further improve contrast and noticably enhances spot structure and granulation over that of the white light image, especially with my achromats.

The yellow and continuim filters show just how sharp my 6" F10 achromat is so I imagine with similar fairly narrow filtration, your 110mm will surprise you one more time. Shoot, try it on your 4" achromat. Easy enough to try.

Enjoy your new toy!

Jeff

#13 Space Dragon

Space Dragon

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Scotland UK

Posted 28 December 2013 - 11:52 AM

Good stuff.....Eddgie got a Wedgie......:-)

Sorry, I'm sleep deprived and had a couple of G&Ts.

I'll get my coat.

Seriously, am looking forward to your detailed first light Ed with this vs. the Baader film.

I have the film and was considering the wedge [and also Ha]....I've heard the wedge shows more.

I'd only consider an Ha scope that supports binos without to much hassle though.

#14 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 28 December 2013 - 03:59 PM

Well my initial and second impression of using he wedge with the Solar Continuum has not been positive.

The view is dimmer than it was with the solar film.

But more than that, I feel as if the contrast with the SC filter is lower than it was in white light with the Baader Film.

Today I was out for an hour and in brief periods of good seeing with the SC filter in, I just felt I was not quite hitting the high spot.

Black detail was excellent and granulation was very pronounced, but the filament structure in the penumbra never really seemed to resolve well.

I pulled out the SC and just went with the NE 3.0 and in the next few seconds of good seeing, that detail that I was used to seeing in the Baader film jumped out again. The image was a bit brighter than I like even at 120x, but I really felt like I was leaving some resolving power on the table when using the SC + 3.0 ND vs. using just the 3.0 ND.

Maybe not a great day for comparing though. It was a bit after noon and sky transparency was not great, but good seeing is good seeing, and I feel as if I saw more using the Baader film under similar conditions.

So, not conclusive yet and I will give the SC more time, but in two sessions using the SC fitler, I don't think I have yet matched the detail I was seeing with the Baader film, but with the 3.0 ND was indeed showing at least as good a contrast, though perhaps to bright to really know if it will improve over the Baader Film.

I had my doubts abou the effectiveness of the SC. It is a very norrow bandpass fitler and the sun is a full spectrum source. I think the SC robs energy from some delicate structure making it more difficult to see.

Only a theory, but I did not feel that the filament structure in penumbra was as good as I am used to seeing

Sadly, weather is not cooperating, and my result is still not at all conclusive. I have to do more comparisons and hope some morning conditions will be more conducive.

Also, it is hard to do the comparison because of the time it takes to put the SC filter in and take it out. Makes an A/B comparison so much more difficult.

#15 mark8888

mark8888

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1777
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2010

Posted 28 December 2013 - 09:30 PM

So, not conclusive yet and I will give the SC more time, but in two sessions using the SC fitler, I don't think I have yet matched the detail I was seeing with the Baader film, but with the 3.0 ND was indeed showing at least as good a contrast, though perhaps to bright to really know if it will improve over the Baader Film.

I had my doubts abou the effectiveness of the SC. It is a very norrow bandpass fitler and the sun is a full spectrum source. I think the SC robs energy from some delicate structure making it more difficult to see.


My experience is the same... and you need to get another ND filter or 2 ASAP! :) Theres no question that the 3.0 alone is much too bright. I think youll always want to use more than that, even at high mag.

#16 Kunama

Kunama

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 745
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 28 December 2013 - 11:23 PM

Ed, I spent a couple of hours today trying the various combinations again.
During the session the seeing began as 5/10 but improved to about 8/10.
When the seeing was not the best I found the Solar Continuum filter/ OD3.0 combination was best,
it showed more detail in everything, especially the faculae and granulation.
As the seeing improved, to the point where no ripples were seen on the limb,
the OD3.0+0.9 gave the best detail in the umbra and particularly the penumbra.

Overall the surface granulation and faculae were definitely much easier to see with the SC.
The combination of the OD3.0 & 1.8 was the 'easiest' on the eyes but at the expense of some detail.

My test rig consists of the Tak TSA120 F7.5, Pentax XF8.5 & 12mm, Vixen LVW 8, 13, 22 and 42mm.
Maybe in the future I will try it with binos.

#17 R Botero

R Botero

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1239
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Kent, England

Posted 29 December 2013 - 02:55 AM

Great thread - keep it coming! I have my wedge with the OD3.0 + SC as default. Got used to the green after a while and seeing is NEVER that good in SE England anyways... :p

#18 mark8888

mark8888

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1777
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2010

Posted 29 December 2013 - 03:03 AM

This is of course a YMMV thing, to each is own, etc etc... but for me it's not important even if you can see 5-10% more detail with the continuum filter. The sun is white, not a very odd glowing lime green, and for me color fidelity is very important. The color of the sun with that filter really couldn't be much more bizarrely different from reality. I wouldn't want to spend hours observing a lime green moon or Jupiter either. Kudos to those whom it doesn't bother. Anyway, though, FWIW, I personally could never see much more detail (perhaps slightly?) with the filter in place.

Maybe in the future I will try it with binos.


You definitely should, you'll love it.

#19 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 29 December 2013 - 10:24 AM

As the seeing improved, to the point where no ripples were seen on the limb,
the OD3.0+0.9 gave the best detail in the umbra and particularly the penumbra.



In fact, I think this is indeed what I observed. When seeing was at its worse, I could dial zOOm back and the view was really excellent withthe SC.

But when those moments of good seeing would occur and I would zOOm in on the sunspots, I just could not for the life of me resolve the kind of detail I was getting with the Baader film.

And this is the problem. I spend most of the session lingering at higher powers waiting for those moments of better seeing because that is where all the really intesting detail can be found in the umbra and penumrba.

In particular, where the filimients extend into the umbra, the border junction has a lot of detail where the filiment tips vary so greatly in lenght.

Also, "Light Islands" would appear in most larger umbra (I did not realize that detail was visible in the umbra of most sun spots until about a month ago, and now I see it regularly). I have not spotted this detail using the Solar Continuum yet.

Granulation does show very nicely in the SC, and pores really jump out.

But I could tell almost immedtiatly that when seeing improved, the fineness of the filiment structure in the penumbra and the way the filitments terminate into the umbra simply never seemed to pop out.

I said I would give it a week or two though, and I will.

But having experienced one improvement after another as I changed from the C5 with a glass fitler to the C5 with the binoviewers, then to the C5 with the Baader film, then the 100mm f/9 acro with the Baader film, and then the 110ED with the Baader film, I saw a truely meaningful step in each equppment.

And with this filter, I feel like I am back to the 100mm Acrho level of detail when using the SC.

Baader suggest this filter for an Achromat, and I do believe that it may in fact offer an improvement for those scopes because my experience between using the 1.25x GPC and not using it showed that chromatic aberration induced by the binovierer itself at f/7 was indeed lowering the contrast.

So, I can see that for the achromat perhaps it is a better filter to use (though I have no intention of trying it with the achromat).

But for the SV110ED, I was getting a fantastic result with the solar fitler and with the ND 3.0, I have seen similar hints, though the image is to bright to know for sure.

I just feel at the moment that the SC is a step back.

Will follow up with observations as they occur and post here.

#20 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 03 January 2014 - 02:00 PM

Ok, a followup. Wanted to post here because this is where I previusly posted that I was having trouble matching the Baader film performance vs the Solar Continuum.

Went out today and just dialed in 82x and did not become distracted by swapping anything out or changing magnificaitons or anything.

I did what I tell everyone else to do and just sat there patiently with the wedge configured with the SC filter.

And I waited and waited.

And then in happened. Several minutes of somewhat steady seeing with 1/2 to 1 second moments of high res viewing.

And in those brief moments - POW! Amazing. Simply stunning. Filiment structure in the penumbra became dramatically sharp, as did a looping sun bridge across a big sun spot. The contrast on the filiments was simply stunning!

I had to leave to run an errand, and when I came back, put the scope out again, and same thing. Several very brief mosments of high res (though the image never seemed to stay perefectly still with a lower period wavering).

And in those moments, I could tell that the Wedge was giving sharper veiwing than the Solar Filter had given.

These moments were sadly very breif, but the contrast was super high when these moments occurred.

And the more I use the SC, the more I am likeing the green. Granulation and facula are beautifully shown, with granulation being easily more pronounced in the SC than I had ever seen with the film. I knew that the first time I used it.

But now, the one area where I had a concern is now turning me to believe that the SC is indeed the right filter for the job.

Still, just because I always want to know for myself, I had already orderd a 25% ND filter, and that should arrive Saturday or Monday.

My intention will be to spend a week alternating back and forth between the ND + ND and the ND + SC combinations, but rather than swapping out, just using each one exclusively for a session, then use the other for the next session so I can just concentrate on observing and not be distracted.

I will open a new thread in the Solar Observing post with a more complete writeup of the Wedge.

For now though, I am feeling the love for the Wedge with the SC. Even though my moments of high res seeing today were brief, I now think that the SC is indeed a better way to view the sun.

I look forward to comparing the ND to the SC though. I still think I might prefer a more natuural color for the sun, and if the amount of detail is the same, then I will go with the ND, but if the SC is better, I am going to learn to love the green.. LOL.

#21 R Botero

R Botero

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1239
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Kent, England

Posted 03 January 2014 - 04:33 PM

Looking forward to that comparison Eddgie. If your findings with the ND^2 setup are good you will convince me to look for one. For the time being I'm sticking with my SC and a green Sun!
Roberto

#22 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 03 January 2014 - 05:31 PM

Well, I was not loving the SC initially, but I was fussing with things a lot, going back and forth between the Much to bright ND alone, and adding the SC.

I should have just been patient.

I would have wanted to do the comparison anyway, but the ND +SC really does do a fantastic job on granulation (which is what the Owner's Manual said it would do) and today, it really did turn in an excellent performance.

So, now I have my doubts that the ND will be better, and the more I used the SC today, the more I was liking it.

In a week (weather permitting) I should have more to report.

I love the wedge though. It is a beautiful piece of gear.

#23 Kunama

Kunama

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 745
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012

Posted 03 January 2014 - 11:34 PM

The funny thing with the Solar Continuum filter is that after a while looking through it you don't really focus on the lime green colour at all just all the detail it reveals. I have now stopped messing about changing the filters and am using the SC+3.0 combination. I am now going to get a Baader Hyperion 31Aspherical eyepiece and the threaded adapter to connect my Nikon to it for some images.

#24 Eddgie

Eddgie

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12688
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 04 January 2014 - 09:28 AM

Yes, the more I used it, the more OK I got with the color, and at low power, I rather like it.

But at higher power, it still bothers me a bit.

Looking forward to comparing the views between the two configurations.

#25 zeehas

zeehas

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Tucson, AZ

Posted 11 January 2014 - 01:36 AM

My setup is a 4" f/15 achromat with a Lunt Hershel wedge in mono-vision mode. I've had good results with using a Baader "contrast filter" (the one said to improve contrast on planets). It gives the sun a pleasing light yellow tint while eliminating the secondary color of the refractor. I also use a single polarizing filter. I find that being able to adjust the intensity greatly improves the detail seen. I'm looking forward to trying my binoviewer with this setup once I get the right adapter. My Maxbright binoviewer has the 2" nose while the Lunt wedge is 1.25".






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics